I am sorry that you took offense at my comments. They were not meant as any sort of insult or personal criticism. I think you misinterpreted my comments to be critical of you. I was simply trying to clarify that the sounds that I was talking are not primarily the result of the low-pass gate (which are certainly an aspect of the sound ). I was in no way saying that you shouldn’t be happy with the sounds you are coming up with.
Right? I am not saying there is anything wrong about what you like. If it gets you to where you want to be that is awesome.
I have not meant to imply in any way that what I like is in any way better than what someone else likes or that anyone should have be in love with the same sounds that I am in love. I have tried to make this clear throughout that this is a matter of personal preference and that many don’t share it.
I didn’t think it would be controversial to say that the aspect of sound created by Buchla systems that is compelling TO ME is more the product of waveshaping, etc than the low-pass gate by itself (as important as the low-pass gates are a part of the sound). That is not to say that YOU should find it compelling.
Since you were responding to a post from me talking about what I find unique and compelling about the sound of some Buchla systems, I thought it was reasonable to say that the low-pass gate is not the most critical aspect (though it certainly is an important part) of that sound.
That was not in any way a criticism of what you like. I was (perhaps ineptly) trying to convey that what I was talking about was a function of other aspects of the sound.
I have not meant to imply that Buchla systems are superior to other systems or that you or anyone else should find the same sounds compelling that I do.
So, you are taking some minor suggestions and molding them into some other point of view that suited the bent you were on. Maybe you could actually provide a suggestion on how exactly one goes about making a patch that would bring us into some of the territory people are willing to spend a mortgage downpayment on to get to. I mean I spent a few hours working on a patch that used @stschoen’s Buchla inspired modules. How could I improve that?
I am really puzzled by this comment. What suggestions am I molding into anything? I was saying nothing about what you should do or what you should like. You were responding to comments by me about what I find compelling about Buchla modules – and I was just saying that there is more to it than the low-pass gate. I am not molding any suggestion to my point of view or suggesting that you should like something different from what you like.
Every musician has equal right to like what they like. If that system gets you to where you want to go: THAT IS GREAT AND I CELEBRATE THAT!
I am not telling you what YOU should like or criticizing a single thing that you have done.
There was zero criticism of stschoen’s patches or contributions. They are awesome and I use many of his modules in my ongoing explorations AND I PLAN TO EXPLORE THESE NEW MODULES – Steve’s work is great. I love it.
And there was zero criticism of your contributions. You post great stuff.
So, I don’t understand why you are being so critical about what I wrote?
I totally get that some people aren’t as fascinated by the topic, and I don’t expect anyone else to.
Maybe you could actually provide a suggestion on how exactly one goes about making a patch that would bring us into some of the territory people are willing to spend a mortgage downpayment on to get to.
I have been spending months experimenting with Audulus trying to do that – and hopefully will have something to share soon.
I have to ask you.
Why would I have to be able to figure out how to create what I am after (and I have not been able to) in order to express my opinion about what I find interesting and unique about Buchla’s oscillators and waveshaping?
p.s. I apologize if this came off as some kind of rant. I am sorry if I have overstayed my welcome in this conversation.
I was not intending to post any more to this thread after both you and @stschoen said that this line of discussion had stopped being of interest. But I felt the post that I am replying to needed a response.
I really did not intend to insult or criticize you, and I feel like your response to gets personal in a way that I don’t understand.